Armstrong v. City of Woodstock, Georgia
| Alex Armstrong |
| City of Woodstock, Georgia |
| 1:2021cv03646 |
| September 1, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
| J P Boulee |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 30, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement by City of Woodstock, Georgia.(Diaz-Caballero, Anna) Text Modified on 10/1/2021 (ayw). |
| Filing 12 Defendant's ANSWER to #1 COMPLAINT by City of Woodstock, Georgia. Discovery ends on 2/28/2022.(Diaz-Caballero, Anna) Please visit our website at http://www.gand.uscourts.gov to obtain Pretrial Instructions. |
| Filing 11 Notice for Leave of Absence for the following date(s): November 24 - 26, 2021, December 20 - 31, 2021, by Anna M Diaz-Caballero. (Diaz-Caballero, Anna) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Appearance by Anna M Diaz-Caballero on behalf of City of Woodstock, Georgia (Diaz-Caballero, Anna) |
| Filing 9 Notice for Leave of Absence for the following date(s): November 22 - 26, 2021, January 24 - 28, 2022, February 21 - 25, 2022, April 4 - 8, 2022, and May 25 - June 13, 2022, by Jeffrey Alan Daxe. (Daxe, Jeffrey) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Jeffrey Alan Daxe on behalf of City of Woodstock, Georgia (Daxe, Jeffrey) |
Filing 7
STANDING ORDER REGARDING CIVIL LITIGATION. Signed by Judge J. P. Boulee on 9/22/21. (bnw)
|
| Clerks Notation re #6 Certificate of Interested Persons approved by JPB. (bnw) |
| Filing 6 Certificate of Interested Persons by Alex Armstrong. (Garber, Alan) |
| Filing 5 Return of Service Executed by Alex Armstrong. City of Woodstock, Georgia served on 9/9/2021, answer due 9/30/2021. (Garber, Alan) |
| Filing 4 Electronic Summons Issued as to City of Woodstock, Georgia. (bnw) |
| Filing 3 PROPOSED SUMMONS filed by Alex Armstrong (Garber, Alan) |
| Filing 2 Electronic Summons Issued as to City of Woodstock, Georgia. (eop) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand filed by Alex Armstrong. (Filing fee $402.00, receipt number AGANDC-11230898) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(eop) Please visit our website at http://www.gand.uscourts.gov/commonly-used-forms to obtain Pretrial Instructions and Pretrial Associated Forms which includes the Consent To Proceed Before U.S. Magistrate form. |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Georgia Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Armstrong v. City of Woodstock, Georgia | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Alex Armstrong | |
| Represented By: | Alan Howard Garber |
| Represented By: | Marc N. Garber |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: City of Woodstock, Georgia | |
| Represented By: | Anna M Diaz-Caballero |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey Alan Daxe |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
